/sci/ - Science & Math

>>15119408
So you're saying a telescope designed to help scientists improve their knowledge about the early universe is telling them things they didn't know about the early universe?

>>15119408
>These are the people telling you to believe dark matter is real.

>>15119431
KILL YOURESELF.
FOR SCIENCE.
IT WILL HELP YOUR COLLEGUES AND THEIR FUNDING, BECAUSE YOU WON'T BE COMPETING FOR GRANT MONEY.
BE THE CHANGE YOU WANT TO SEE IN THE WORLD.

What kind of dumbass "scientists" make hypotheses about things, collect data to determine their accuracy, and use what they find to refine their ideas? Idiots.

>>15119452
>implying implications
They are telling you hey this could be real, lets look.

>>15119467
>telling you to believe dark matter is real.
>hey this could be real, lets look.
Yes, that's a more reasonable claim

>>15119463
Certainly not the ones at the CDC.

No one has anything to say about the news that galaxies formed far sooner than previously believed? You're much more interested in some meta drama than the actual science? This discovery dovetails in well with the earlier one that calls the existing theories about the Big Bang into question. Guess cosmology being turned upside down and shaken up has made some rather defensive.

>>15119483
I don't think any here are defensive, they are interesting observations from the jwst

>>15119483
These are kinda cool discoveries, I am left wondering how it may tie into concepts of quantum gravity, either as support for or against it.

I wonder what new cope they will come up with.

>>15119408
>"WHY DON'T SOIENTISTS REJECT OR CORRECT THEIR MODELS WHEN NEW DATA IS GATHERED"
>"WHY DO SOIENTISTS ACKNOWLEDGE THAT NEW DATA MAY MEAN CHANGING THIER MODELS"
Can you contrarians make up your minds, or are you going to complain regardless?

So if galaxies formed far earlier than thought where are all the ayys? This makes the Fermi Paradox even more paradoxical.

>>15119483
cosmology isn't science, it has no disprovable theories or repeatable experiments, it only has conjecture and delusions of grandiosity

>>15119408
So no dark matter,just more normal matter then was previously observable?

The dark matter clouds are just neutrinos in galactic gravitational orbit aren't they .

>>15119881
As long as "the science is settled" continues to be a common narrative in the scientific community (no, it's not just IFLS! plebbitors doing it, as the pandemic response by the scientific community makes clear), they will continue to be rightfully roasted when they get something wrong.

>>15119881
>complain regardless
That is the standard of a healthy scientific environment.
If a theory IS true, then all arguments against it WILL fail.
If the arguments against it fail, then the proposed theory lives another day.

>>15119431
>scientists form ideas based on the data they have
>new data comes that challenges or disproves the existing idea
>scientists change their ideas to be in line with the new data
I don't understand the mindset that this is bad, or worse, somehow dishonest. I don't know where the gotcha moment in OP's head is supposed to exist. This is what you would want scientists to do. If earlier ideas are observably wrong, why would scientists be expected to keep championing them? That just wastes everyone's time and resources. If you get new data that disproves your idea and you continue to believe the idea anyways, you are behaving in a faith-based manner more appropriate to religion than science. Data and dogma are not the same thing, and some people seem to be genuinely incapable of understanding that.

>>15120796
It's mostly a reaction to science now being held out as being unquestionable. Even worse are those who pretend that's not the case when anyone with functional senses sees and hears it daily. Then there are the sycophants who go along with science being above question, until data proves something wrong, at which point they pretend they always were open minded about the possibilities.
Science, as practiced and presented in western societies, is trying to be a religion while taking no responsibility when their edicts turn out to be incorrect. It's a religion with constantly shifting unquestionable beliefs. Very strange that people can work in such an environment without having a mental breakdown but it appears some love it and want it to become even more dogmatic-fluid.

So the first stars where those mega gigantic blue or black hole stars?

>>15120682
this
astrology unironically adheres to the scientific method more than the astronomy oriented fake scientists do

>>15120796
Because nobody is revising their theory. They just add more cope constants to mathematically torture the results to fit the theories. This discovery should disprove a huge majority of astrophysical dogma but most authorities are simply claiming they were right all along even though their prediction was off by eons.

>>15119408
>>15119431
I hate all the dumb clickbait Fake MSM articles about it.
Just fucking wait until the scientific papers have gone through peer review, I’m sick of all the “maybe” or “may not” “change our understanding of the Universe”.

>>15121825
>scientific papers have gone through peer review
even faker than MSM

>>15119881
I'll stop complaining when a theory is discarded and not amended.

>>15121803
Get ready to learn about astronomy's newest discovery: Dark Eons.

>>15120796
the religious nut fails to understand anything but dogma

So we move the big bang back few few billion years, big deal

>>15123199
kek

>>15123199

>>15121825
>Just fucking wait until the scientific papers have gone through peer review
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Replication_crisis

>>15119408
>NOOOOOOOOO THEY WEREN'T 100% CORRECT ON THE SUBJECT OF GALAXY FORMATION, THIS MEAN'S THEY'RE ALWAYS WRONG NOOOOOOOOOO CUT THEIR FUNDING
what a homosexual worldview

>>15119483
It doesn't exactly challenge big bang or the age of the universe either, it challenges the models of early galaxy formation.

>>15120796
>If earlier ideas are observably wrong
They shouldn't have had these ideas in the first place and that's the point you pseud.

>>15119408
Daily reminder to never question the science. Galaxies are safe and effective.
Possible side effects:
Niggers

>>15125593
nobody cares about the subject of galaxy formation, why is money being spent to study such a useless topic? what kind of a useless person would devote their lives to making conjectures about galaxy formation, especially knowing that the data thats available is so insubstantial that any conjecture is bound to be no better than a wild guess? how can that even be considered science?

>>15125636
>why is money being spent to study such a useless topic
because it's interesting
>how can that even be considered science?
because it is researched by using scientific method, you personally not liking it due to your militant politics does nit mean that astronomy is not a science with disprovable theories

>>15125636
> nobody cares about the subject of galaxy formation
only people living in galaxies care.

>>15125636
fr fr niggers need their gibs and reparations instead of this gay science shit

>>15125636
Disproving decades of soience by destroying the Big Bang model is extremely valuable and will save trillions.